Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Cork developments

Options
1…5960626465…301

Comments

  • Options
    #1832
    AugustusMinimus
    Registered Users Posts: 4,547 ✭✭✭AugustusMinimus


    Tomtom364 wrote: »
    That looks to be addressed in the proposed plans for the road
    linked earlier

    The footpath looks just as narrow in those plans.


  • Options
    #1833
    chalkitdown1
    Registered Users Posts: 1,471 ✭✭✭chalkitdown1


    AugustusMinimus wrote: »
    The footpath looks just as narrow in those plans.

    The huge walkway on the opposite side will make up for it you'd imagine. You can see a crossing to it behind the bus in the render.


  • Options
    #1834
    thomas anderson.
    Registered Users Posts: 1,110 ✭✭✭thomas anderson.


    That footpath is plenty wide, I use it everyday


  • Options
    #1835
    Treviso
    Registered Users Posts: 735 ✭✭✭Treviso


    How much footfall do you expect to go down that footpath. It's wide enough.


  • Options
    #1836
    who_me
    Registered Users Posts: 3,669 ✭✭✭who_me


    munstermagic11 wrote: »
    That looks fantastic!

    It really makes me think it's a shame we see so little use of stone in new, modern buildings.

    (Note - I'm not saying we make classical style cut-stone buildings from now until the end of time. ...or until Cork floods due to global warming... But just some use of stone like this, in combination with modern glass styling, can be absolutely stunning.)


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1837
    who_me
    Registered Users Posts: 3,669 ✭✭✭who_me


    Treviso wrote: »
    How much footfall do you expect to go down that footpath. It's wide enough.

    A hell of a lot.

    3000+ will work in Navigation Square alone. If each new, further development along the South Docklands adds similar numbers, and Albert Quay is the most direct way to the existing city centre, I think it'll be very, very busy.


  • Options
    #1838
    Treviso
    Registered Users Posts: 735 ✭✭✭Treviso


    who_me wrote: »
    A hell of a lot.

    3000+ will work in Navigation Square alone. If each new, further development along the South Docklands adds similar numbers, and Albert Quay is the most direct way to the existing city centre, I think it'll be very, very busy.

    They are the same size as the footpaths going past One Albert Quay, and they are plenty wide enough for the staff in there.

    Once the 2nd building is complete, there will also be an entrance at the back of the complex on Albert Road. Would you prefer they remove the bus lane, cycle lanes or 2 driving car lanes in order for pedestrians to have more room?


  • Options
    #1839
    namloc1980
    Registered Users Posts: 18,185 ✭✭✭✭namloc1980


    Treviso wrote: »
    They are the same size as the footpaths going past One Albert Quay, and they are plenty wide enough for the staff in there.

    Once the 2nd building is complete, there will also be an entrance at the back of the complex on Albert Road. Would you prefer they remove the bus lane, cycle lanes or 2 driving car lanes in order for pedestrians to have more room?

    There's plenty of space there. The opposite side of the road on the quayside is going to be huge.


  • Options
    #1840
    Treviso
    Registered Users Posts: 735 ✭✭✭Treviso


    namloc1980 wrote: »
    There's plenty of space there. The opposite side of the road on the quayside is going to be huge.

    Thats for the planned boardwalk and pontoon area, which IMO the wider the better. There will be 5 pedestrian crossings available should anyone feel trapped by these "narrow" footpaths.


  • Options
    #1841
    hans aus dtschl
    Registered Users Posts: 3,104 ✭✭✭hans aus dtschl


    Treviso wrote: »
    Would you prefer they remove the bus lane, cycle lanes or 2 driving car lanes in order for pedestrians to have more room?

    Go for the second driving lane, thanks.

    I'm not convinced it's needed at present, though I don't have access to traffic counts here.
    In any case the priority is always pedestrians first, then cyclists, public transport and private motors, in that order.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1842
    AugustusMinimus
    Registered Users Posts: 4,547 ✭✭✭AugustusMinimus


    Treviso wrote: »
    They are the same size as the footpaths going past One Albert Quay, and they are plenty wide enough for the staff in there.

    Once the 2nd building is complete, there will also be an entrance at the back of the complex on Albert Road. Would you prefer they remove the bus lane, cycle lanes or 2 driving car lanes in order for pedestrians to have more room?

    It’s a lot narrower than in front of 1 Albert Quay. A lot.


  • Options
    #1843
    namloc1980
    Registered Users Posts: 18,185 ✭✭✭✭namloc1980


    hans aus dtschl wrote: »
    Go for the second driving lane, thanks.

    I'm not convinced it's needed at present, though I don't have access to traffic counts here.
    In any case the priority is always pedestrians first, then cyclists, public transport and private motors, in that order.

    Is it??? If that were true we wouldn't have cycle lanes being routinely used as car parks around the city, or a nearly year long uproar over a partial bus lane on Patrick Street.


  • Options
    #1844
    chalkitdown1
    Registered Users Posts: 1,471 ✭✭✭chalkitdown1


    who_me wrote: »
    A hell of a lot.

    3000+ will work in Navigation Square alone. If each new, further development along the South Docklands adds similar numbers, and Albert Quay is the most direct way to the existing city centre, I think it'll be very, very busy.

    Are you expecting the 3000 people to be on the footpath at the same time? lol

    There's plenty room there and triple on the other side of the road. What are we even arguing about here? It's a non-issue.


  • Options
    #1845
    who_me
    Registered Users Posts: 3,669 ✭✭✭who_me


    chalkitdown1 wrote: »
    Are you expecting the 3000 people to be on the footpath at the same time? lol

    There's plenty room there and triple on the other side of the road. What are we even arguing about here? It's a non-issue.

    At or around 9am, lunchtime and 5/6pm, yes, I do.

    Quite a lot more, actually, since that's just the number in Navigation Square. And this quayside will be the most direct route from the South Docklands towards the existing city centre, I'd expect most of the foot traffic from there to pass along Albert Quay.

    Apologies if this argument doesn't interest you. Perhaps you should consider not arguing, if that is the case? Just a suggestion.


  • Options
    #1846
    Treviso
    Registered Users Posts: 735 ✭✭✭Treviso


    who_me wrote: »
    At or around 9am, lunchtime and 5/6pm, yes, I do.

    Quite a lot more, actually, since that's just the number in Navigation Square. And this quayside will be the most direct route from the South Docklands towards the existing city centre, I'd expect most of the foot traffic from there to pass along Albert Quay.

    Apologies if this argument doesn't interest you. Perhaps you should consider not arguing, if that is the case? Just a suggestion.

    Most people will use the boardwalk when coming from the Docklands.

    From passing there earlier, they did indeed widen the footpaths. I presume they were restricted by how much they could, by having to use the existing structure facade.

    One Albert quay's footpaths are wider because the building is further back from the river


  • Options
    #1847
    hans aus dtschl
    Registered Users Posts: 3,104 ✭✭✭hans aus dtschl


    namloc1980 wrote: »
    Is it??? If that were true we wouldn't have cycle lanes being routinely used as car parks around the city, or a nearly year long uproar over a partial bus lane on Patrick Street.

    Believe me, I'm with you 100% on this.

    I was saying the priority in an ideal world is pedestrians first etc.


  • Options
    #1848
    snotboogie
    Registered Users Posts: 3,581 ✭✭✭snotboogie


    Business groups: 'We need certainty and accountability on events centre project ... or Cork's economy will suffer'

    What an absolute ****show. I still don't understand what the current delay is about? I thought that the extra funding was always going to be a loan, so why is it stalled again? Why are the city council now looking for legal advice after the department of culture spent the last 12 months going through the exact same process?


  • Options
    #1849
    leahyl
    Registered Users Posts: 14,258 ✭✭✭✭leahyl


    snotboogie wrote: »
    Business groups: 'We need certainty and accountability on events centre project ... or Cork's economy will suffer'

    What an absolute ****show. I still don't understand what the current delay is about? I thought that the extra funding was always going to be a loan, so why is it stalled again? Why are the city council now looking for legal advice after the department of culture spent the last 12 months going through the exact same process?

    It's an absolute farce :mad:


  • Options
    #1850
    CHealy
    Registered Users Posts: 1,800 ✭✭✭CHealy


    snotboogie wrote: »
    What an absolute ****show. I still don't understand what the current delay is about?

    The current delay, and all further delays until it has been officially axed, are the various stakeholders trying their very best to wriggle their way out of this event center. Its very clear BAM/ Live Nation/ Government/ City Council have no interest in proceeding with a center that is not viable. Thats the hard truth.


  • Options
    #1851
    Roger Hassenforder
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,555 ✭✭✭Roger Hassenforder


    snotboogie wrote: »
    Business groups: 'We need certainty and accountability on events centre project ... or Cork's economy will suffer'

    What an absolute ****show. I still don't understand what the current delay is about? I thought that the extra funding was always going to be a loan, so why is it stalled again? Why are the city council now looking for legal advice after the department of culture spent the last 12 months going through the exact same process?

    Surely to fcuk theres some cost benifet analysis of this on the local economy?
    Theyre fighting over fairly small sums (10mill?), why couldnt City Council just borrow it?
    Public money is cheap at the moment.

    Meanwhile County Council are trying to borrow 130millon.
    https://www.google.ie/amp/s/amp.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/european-bank-funding-sought-for-cork-county-906947.html


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1852
    snotboogie
    Registered Users Posts: 3,581 ✭✭✭snotboogie


    Roger Hassenforder wrote: »
    Surely to fcuk theres some cost benifet analysis of this on the local economy?
    Theyre fighting over fairly small sums (10mill?), why couldnt City Council just borrow it?
    Public money is cheap at the moment.

    Meanwhile County Council are trying to borrow 130millon.
    https://www.google.ie/amp/s/amp.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/european-bank-funding-sought-for-cork-county-906947.html

    It would invalidate the tender process.


  • Options
    #1853
    Rebelbrowser
    Registered Users Posts: 3,141 ✭✭✭Rebelbrowser


    snotboogie wrote: »
    It would invalidate the tender process.

    But the only people who could act on foot of this (I think) would be OCP as the disappointed other tenderer and I really doubt they would. In fact I think they have publicly said they wouldn't at some stage?

    I wonder what effect the NCH debacle might have here? BAM obviously copped a lot of bad publicity on that. On the one hand might that make them more likely to plough on with the Events Centre to avoid further bad publicity? Alternatively the public spat with Leo Varadker could make them even less inclined to go ahead with the Events Centre...

    Hopefully the former not the latter!


  • Options
    #1854
    Roger Hassenforder
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,555 ✭✭✭Roger Hassenforder


    snotboogie wrote: »
    It would invalidate the tender process.

    The whole tender process is questionable.
    Live nation on both competing bids, goes to "redesign" to make it more viable on being awarded one of them...


  • Options
    #1855
    Markcheese
    Registered Users Posts: 8,440 ✭✭✭Markcheese


    Roger Hassenforder wrote: »
    Surely to fcuk theres some cost benifet analysis of this on the local economy?
    Theyre fighting over fairly small sums (10mill?), why couldnt City Council just borrow it?
    Public money is cheap at the moment.

    Meanwhile County Council are trying to borrow 130millon.
    https://www.google.ie/amp/s/amp.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/european-bank-funding-sought-for-cork-county-906947.html
    Just give bam another 10 million,
    And another, and another
    Shure at that rate we might as well build a children's hospital...

    Slava ukraini 🇺🇦



  • Options
    #1856
    Roger Hassenforder
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,555 ✭✭✭Roger Hassenforder


    Markcheese wrote: »
    Just give bam another 10 million,
    And another, and another
    Shure at that rate we might as well build a children's hospital...

    True
    Should have pulled the plug went it went back to design.


  • Options
    #1857
    flo8s967qjh0nd
    Closed Accounts Posts: 879 ✭✭✭flo8s967qjh0nd


    Too late now. Too many politicians (ok, one in particular) have staked their reputation on this. In effect, signing a blank cheque for the developers. This is too big to fail, but that's no guarantee it won't.


  • Options
    #1858
    PreCocious
    Registered Users Posts: 383 ✭✭PreCocious


    Roger Hassenforder wrote: »
    Surely to fcuk theres some cost benifet analysis of this on the local economy?
    Theyre fighting over fairly small sums (10mill?), why couldnt City Council just borrow it?
    Public money is cheap at the moment.

    Meanwhile County Council are trying to borrow 130millon.
    https://www.google.ie/amp/s/amp.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/european-bank-funding-sought-for-cork-county-906947.html

    The problem is that the tenderers didn't stick to their price and are relying on councilors saying "ah sure it's only 10m more,. it's worth it for Cork boy".

    We're at the stage where other tenderers and those who didn't tender are thinking "Hmm, the subsidy was larger than expected".

    BAM should be told to pack their bags.


  • Options
    #1859
    mire
    Registered Users Posts: 490 ✭✭mire


    It will be interesting to see if the applicants submit a response to the further information request as part of the planning application. That will tell a lot. Either this project is viable or it's not. The real cost of this, and the viability of the project, was known a long time ago.


  • Options
    #1860
    Dbu
    Registered Users Posts: 1,082 ✭✭✭Dbu


    And construction costs are rising by the week


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1861
    snotboogie
    Registered Users Posts: 3,581 ✭✭✭snotboogie


    mire wrote: »
    It will be interesting to see if the applicants submit a response to the further information request as part of the planning application. That will tell a lot. Either this project is viable or it's not. The real cost of this, and the viability of the project, was known a long time ago.

    I don't know why they went to all of the effort to submit the planning in October only to then balk at the relatively smaller job of providing additional information. Something has turned BAM off this in the interim.


Advertisement